erock68la

So all it removes is the belief in god? What about the memory of belief in god? For many that belief is the glue that holds their fragile psyche together.
It would be very tempting to rid the world of it and let the chips fall where they may. But I agree with Strega, “madness and mayhem”, so no.

Impressive answers @all of you. ??

Unseen wrote:

Davis wrote:
You don’t need to reference anything you don’t want to…but the red flags are utterly flapping violently in the wind. Perhaps I am ignorant per these two terms. I don’t want to remain ignorant and…I would be delighted to learn a new, standardised and obvious set of terms used in academia or intellectual discourse…

[Read more]

@unseen, the two examples you gave in your reply to me were the same as mine. We seem to be in agreement.

Davis wrote:You don’t need to reference anything you don’t want to…but the red flags are utterly flapping violently in the wind. Perhaps I am ignorant per these two terms. I don’t want to remain ignorant and…I would be delighted to learn a new, standardised and obvious set of terms used in academia or intellectual discourse. If it is so obvious I…

[Read more]

Or worse, someone pushing a big red button to make all atheists born-again Christians. Keep your damn buttons!

I think the effect of pressing your button, @Davis, would be instant madness and mayhem, maybe decades later settling in to some kind of improvement, but at what cost? You can’t throw away the crutches before you heal the patient.…[Read more]

I understand hesitating both ways Simon and Belle. Let’s ask the inverse. Would you appreciate anyone removing any beliefs (rational or not), personal tastes, memories or now defunct/discredited ideas/knowledge from your mind? Would the fact that it wasn’t personally tailored for you but done en masse by a dictator with his finger on a button make…[Read more]

You don’t need to reference anything you don’t want to…but the red flags are utterly flapping violently in the wind. Perhaps I am ignorant per these two terms. I don’t want to remain ignorant and…I would be delighted to learn a new, standardised and obvious set of terms used in academia or intellectual discourse. If it is so obvious I doubt it…[Read more]

Simon Mathews wrote:Actually, my understanding is that an ad hominem fallacy is about the person not their argument. The fallacy is that you argue against a person’s personal characteristics rather than their logic. For example if you say Dr Bob’s arguments are bad because he is a Christian that is an ad hominem fallacy. If you post that Dr Bob…

[Read more]

@unseen, @davis. Actually, my understanding is that an ad hominem fallacy is about the person not their argument. The fallacy is that you argue against a person’s personal characteristics rather than their logic. For example if you say Dr Bob’s arguments are bad because he is a Christian that is an ad hominem fallacy. If you post that Dr Bob is a…[Read more]

Davis wrote:Can you direct me to a book or website which explains the difference between the fallacy and attack?

You honestly don’t know the difference between an attack and a fallacy? I’m sorry. I find that hard to believe.

In a verbal attack, you are attempting to damage someone’s reputation or self-esteem. When it comes to fallacies, you are…[Read more]

@Unseen That is new to me unseen. As I was taught…an ad hominem fallacy is an attack. Can you direct me to a book or website which explains the difference between the fallacy and attack?

I understand where @bellerose is coming from because that was my exact first reaction too. It seems better that someone works through stuff than it is magically removed.

However, given the button is magical and therefore could not only remove belief in God but any memory of that belief I would do it. Everyone would then be free to re-form that…[Read more]

Davis wrote:No…this falacy applies to debate on a particular topic (which is not under debate here). It does not apply when considering the weight of someone’s opinion in a decision making process, as a leader or as a representative (as opposed to proving that someone is objectively correct or not). If someone is unreliable or is known not to act…

[Read more]

Davis wrote:
And so…outing someone who works against your interests within a group is okay…but outing someone outside of your group who works against your interests is not okay. I can see how this might be fair…but perhaps you can explain why?

To be clear, I was thinking of the case where someone is pretending to be in Group A, is working with…[Read more]